Nothing like rehashing a dated pissing contest.
As I have already stated, no matter your angle of approach you are not going to convince me of what I have already stated in this thread. It's all here for you to read and I give reasons for my beliefs.
What I don't understand is it seemed like you were at peace with what I stated and now, years later it's as if you are salty once again. All I can tell you is just deal with it. You really shouldn't care what I believe and shouldn't waste your time trying to sell your numbers.

 

Ahhh, don't take your toys and run home now. Your validation was never required we covered that in 2003. It's interesting you now take the position that you have had a casual interest in my car and yet looking through this thread your post count would suggest otherwise.



I guess I missed the part where you listed your reasons for believing a bone stock LT1 fbody at 250 rwhp weighing 3600#'s will run 103-105 mph. Would you mind posting those reasons again just to be clear? Certainly you must have come across literally thousands of those cars in your 10 years here since you personally know of countless 400 rwhp 120 mph monsters running around.

Please enlighten us with your wisdom since you have had all the answers since 1998.

 

Some of you guys take yourselves waaaay too seriously, lol.

Those are good numbers... don't care what anyone says, grats!

 

This is hilarious. I've always had a vested interest in this car. I've never stated otherwise. What.. you don't remember the multi-page debacle on EFA because I just simply wanted a race? No money involved and it was carnage. Joe even threw you under the bus and said you couldn't drive and gave excuses about the 10-bolt/12-bolt theory. I suggested he drive and he didn't like that too well either. It was quite fascinating.
There's no reason to request pointless info regarding stock numbers since it has nothing to do with your car or your numbers. What's been said has been said based on observation and experience. You choose not to believe it. So be it. I'm just trying to figure out who you're attempting to convince. Me or you...

 

Oh you mean all that **** talking you were doing without a car that was even running? Yeah I remember that. I also recall when the cubed monster had the entire track cleared for your blistering 12.5 run. That was some great driving there Vin Diesel. You threw yourself under the bus. I hear you were quite impressed. It wasn't determined whether it was about the time or the fact it made it the entire 1/4 mile.

Everyone here knows you build the fastest LT1's on the planet and no one can run with a single car you have had a hand in building, we get that. We also know you are the expert at dyno vs track times and you will argue about it to the death in every thread. All I'm asking you to do is support your theory.



Back to your magic fairy dust formula

Yes I broke down your formula to it's most basic form, a bone stock LT1 at 250 rwhp at your 3600 weight. My car has already demonstrated what the added horsepower will do and was quite consistent and you agreed. We seem to be hung up on the starting point of whether bone stock LT1's will run 98-100 mph as I believe though I am a merely a novice or the 103-105 mph you believe in as an expert of the LT1. Are you telling me you don't stand by your numbers now? You will not support your 103-105 mph theory? I am not asking for you to retype it a simple link would be fine. You have 10 years of giving advice riding on this. I'm sure you will want to protect your credibility or in terms that you can understand 'aren't you concerned about your street cred Vin?'

 

The **** talk was going both ways. Yes the car has had a few combos on it that have failed. When I had the idea to first run you I still had a combo that was turning 12.0 to 12.1's @ 115 which was making almost 100rwhp less than what you are allegedly running. That's what I couldn't understand. I knew I would most likely get beat, but you all took it to an entirely different level in thinking I was stating I would win. I just wanted to see how badly I'd get beat.

I'm not coming up with any formulas. This is all you.
You are right. Everyone lived under a rock before your car came about. Nothing was fast until you achieved breaking the "record." If that is therapy for you then so be it. Knock yourself out.
Mark Wilgus, Chris Bennight, Chris Marsh and Jordon Musser were a few who used to post on this board before your time and were excellent references and resources to their successful combos which were all in the low 400rwhp mark at a 3600 to 3650lb race weight running 118 to 120mph. However since you've reinvented the LT stock block "wheel" and they no longer post here their accomplishments are invalid.
I don't know why you are getting so salty. As stated, why should you care what I, "Vin Diesel" post up? I said for what your car is it's impressive. I just don't believe in the dyno numbers. I guess that's just not enough for you to where you have to make this a spectacle once again.

 

LOL what do you do run every ricer that revs on you because you will indulge him on how bad he wants to get beat. Are you mentally challenged?

Maybe it's just me but that sure looks like your user name in that quote not mine. You wrote X x X= X All I did was break it down to it's simplest form. A bone stock LT1 with no gears, no stall converters, nothing. Your equation should hold true with different factors, I mean since you believe in it so much.

Let me guess. All of those guys you listed also ran 103-105 mph bone stock but that was also "before my time".

You certainly are an expert at one thing, avoiding the question. You should be in politics. Now show me all of these bone stock 103-105 mph thoroughbreds you personally know of.

We all know you don't have any. Your equation isn't worth the post you wasted to type it in. And if you still believe it take a look at the Impala numbers recently posted and begin a new crusade of why 400 rwhp should = 146 mph at 4600 pounds because with your equation your cars are severely under performing. That is what you preach isn't it? X hp at X weight runs X.


t'is sad to see how far the bone stock LT1 has regressed over the years since back in the day of '98 when they all ran 103+ mph. But at least we still have you around to assure us that it was all true because you said so.

One more question. With all of your experience and that which was here back in the day. How is it when it comes to engine building you were left so far behind? How could have possibly failed....more than once.

 

Yes, but as stated I have no shame in saying I took interest in your car. Now you are here, like in the past when I just wanted to get a simple race going, making this a much larger deal than it is. Ego is a real mother****er isn't it.
This is what you don't understand. It's not a formula. It is an observation from past references of people I've known and went to the track with.
Far be it from me to say you haven't been around. I just assumed with you being on this forum as long as you have w/ your post count you weren't very active back in the late 90's? My apologies for questioning your knowledge.
Because for some reason you have revived your bitterness in this latest go 'round and me having to repeat myself, this question has nothing to do with deflecting from the topic of this thread which happens to be questionable dyno numbers compared to 1/4mi MPH. This will not help your cause in the slightest. I have two options here- One being trust several sources from those that I have known personally, seen dynoed and raced or trust the only source who has proclaimed his car Numero Uno who has posted up controversial numbers using a dyno that cannot be trusted for reasons listed. Toughie...
Wasn't "engine building" that was the failure. It was heads/cam combinations I was trying out.
The very fact that you are grasping at anything by slinging as much garbage as you can with making something completely out of nothing from your good ol' buddy "Vin" just makes me giggle. I mean really, since you believe I have nothing to offer why can't you accept the simple fact that I don't believe your numbers jive? As stated, I don't know who you are trying to convince here.

 

Blah...dyno numbers....last time out my car ran 123 mph and MAYBE averaged 400 rwhp, breaking up, short shifting, etc with minor weight reduction, but then add a TH-400, 12 bolt, KBDD subframes, etc...still not a light car.

Any dyno numbers MINUS a Dynojet I look at like they are bull****...end of story.

Dyno's are tuning tools...not end all of how they car will run.

 

Have you forgotten the days of you bragging about your street racing/driving prowess Vin. Where everyone in the "burg" knows of you. and yet you take all of that skill of a world class driver and bust out a ....12.5.


Follow along. We're talking about your numbers. Numbers you posted and preach about every time there's a dyno thread even up to a couple of months ago.

Canton has mentioned yet again dyno's are for tuning which Joe schooled you on in 2003 and it still hasn't sunk in yet. You 5 years later you are still stuck on xHp x xwt = mph. Different combo's yield different results. Everyone knows that except you. So now I'm trying to understand it from your point of view since you are ignoring the masses point of view on this board. I have asked you to explain yourself and all you do is spout of about days long ago before my time. So here we are with a database mysteriously deleting all information about your stock monsters that roamed long ago. What a shame.

Since search has yielded no results on your infamous cars,
In your experienced opinion why do you think stock times dropped off so much after I signed up here?


And you still shouldn't have failed, not once, with all the tried and true combo's of your day and your trusted sources and connections.

 

Nice work Canton. Quickshot did the same about 4 years ago with a similar setup, stock bottom th350.


I know of an LS1 that put down 305 on a dynojet and went 11.8 @ 111/112. I don't need to tell you what threw the numbers off. But lets not go to deep into that SS RRR's trusty dyno decoder ring will short circuit.

 

OK guys, since you brought this post back up with BS, can anyone tell me if Joe still does cam work, I heard a while back he was cutting back to take care of his day job, but I am seeing more and more Joe O cams in sigs now, is he back or what?

 

Perhaps you should follow your own advice? Read:
As well as another thread made on EFA about you and your great dyno numbers.
I know it very well. I also know that this thread was about your dyno numbers. I have posted up one good example as to why you should not trust dyno dynamics if you are going to reference your dyno numbers as some record breaking combo and you've lost your mind with posting all kinds of nonsense.
You say I should go into politics.... Are you sure you aren't a journalist for the New York Times or equivalent?

No.

 

My car is faster than yours!

 

And my mom will beat up yours!